IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 7724 of 2008()
1. K.MOHAN DAS
... Petitioner
2. G.RAVINDRAN NAIR, S/O.AGED 38,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. M/S. VIDEOCON INTERNATIONAL LTD
For Petitioner :SRI.M.RAMASWAMY PILLAI
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :13/01/2009
O R D E R
K.HEMA, J.
------------------------------
B.A. No.7724 OF 2008
------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of January, 2009
O R D E R
This petition is for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offence is under Section 420 read with 34
of I.P.C. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the details
of the allegations are not known to him, since petitioners are
accused in a case pending before Magistrate court in
Gaziabad.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the
case was instituted in the year 2005 and petitioners were once
arrested and produced before court and thereafter, they were
released on bail. Now, there is no warrant pending against
petitioners. But an order was passed by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court transferring the case from the Gaziabad court to the
court in Ernakulam. In such circumstances, anticipatory bail
may be granted to petitioners, since petitioners apprehend
arrest.
On hearing both sides, it appears that the case was
instituted in the year 2005, alleging a non bailable offence. It
B.A.No.7724 of 2008
2
also appears that petitioners were once granted bail by the
Gaziabad court and thereafter, they had not appeared in any
court and in all probabilities, non bailable warrant would have
been issued for securing the presence of the accused, if the
proceedings are pending before any court. Without confirming
the relevant details, it may not be proper by this court to
invoke provision under Section 438 Cr.P.C. and grant
anticipatory bail. If petitioners are required for the purpose of
trial in execution of a non bailable warrant lawfully issued by
any court, Section 438 cannot be invoked to grant anticipatory
bail, since granting of anticipatory bail may interfere in the
lawful proceedings before another court.
The petition is dismissed.
K.HEMA, JUDGE
pac